Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The LDs would fancy their chances if Parish resigns – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 3 in General
The LDs would fancy their chances if Parish resigns – politicalbetting.com

Sky News understands Neil Parish is now likely to quit within hours after massive pressure from friends on him to step downThe Tory “porn MP” has been told by allies his position untenable because of the way he kept quiet and allowed speculation form about Tory colleagues.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,394
    First.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113
    Fourth like the Tories in Titterton and Honeytown.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,529
    Would Dr Wollaston have a chance here. Quite a long way from Totnes perhaps.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,490
    I don't believe there are any local elections within the constituency next week. The LDs are part of the ruling coalition at Mid Devon - both it and East Devon were Conservative controlled until the 2019 elections (just a hint for thos looking ahead, the 2023 local elections are going to be much easier for the Conservatives and much harder for the LDs).

    So much depends on candidate selection and establishing a clear narrative of being the only possible alternative to the incumbent.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    As I said in the last thread, LibDem gain in the offing.

    I do live this guy though. "accidentally" googled "Step Mom Fucked" whilst in the Commons. Says its a "weight off his shoulders" now he's been outed instead of having various colleagues suspected. Says he will "carry on" until suddenly his position is untenable. No wonder he has a big majority, a big brain on this one.

    So, gets to take the Chiltern Hundreds for the crime of accidentally watching Backdoor Sluts 9, but his boss still thinks lying to parliament and breaking your own laws is fine. Its another good day for the "We Are The Party Of Law And Order" Tory Party
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,884
    With N Shropshire as the template and form guide this looks like an LD certainty. In NS the LDs won from a mathematically hopeless position. Their starting point here both current and historic is quite a bit better. They will start odds on.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 23,620
    We’ve now been told Neil Parish has gone to his constituency to resign and will be making a statement on camera shortly.
    More on #C4News https://twitter.com/darshnasoni/status/1520372676086448128
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
  • PensfoldPensfold Posts: 191
    Will Labour give way to Lib Dems in Tiverton?

    Will Lib Dems give way to Labour in Tiverton?

    Or will neither give way and let Conservatives back in?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    I’m not at all confident of LD chances in this seat. They start way behind and Parish’s downfall is not equivalent to O-Patz’s contempt for voters.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923
    LDs would be favourites in a Tiverton by election but if Boris survived North Shropshire he would survive that too. Provided the local election results next week and polls are not too disastrous
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    About what? AIUI a spokesperson was asked a question at the time and gave the wrong answer. Its only become a "lie" now because of the attempt to create a scandal. But as a legal campaigning event it doesn't matter if she was there or not because legally she could be.

    Do have to laugh though. "Its a work event" accepted without question with the PM's fiance there by teh same people now screeching on Twitter about "conspiracies"
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    The good news for Labour is LD successes at by-elections is not at their expense, since they still benefit at any GE - simply because a LD by election win undermines the Tories, but come GE people will still see, in more winnable seats for them, that Labour are the principal opposition.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,780
    Neil, no longer of that Parish, apparently.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited April 30

    I’m not at all confident of LD chances in this seat. They start way behind and Parish’s downfall is not equivalent to O-Patz’s contempt for voters.

    The public don't seem to necessarily punish parties directly for what the previous MP did though. Incumbent parties have won even when the previous MP was convicted of a crime. So I'd assume it's more whether the prevailing political conditions are ripe for a punishment from the voters, rather than the late MP's actions being deserving of punishment.

    So the question is whether sufficient numbers are motivated to kick the Tories in this seat. I'd think the signs are promising at the least, even though it being such a bloody big majority still makes it hard.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    edited April 30
    It’s also not a good look for Labour to throw another election.

    They need this to coincide with the expected Yorkshire one, and perhaps even Hodge Hill too.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    About what? AIUI a spokesperson was asked a question at the time and gave the wrong answer. Its only become a "lie" now because of the attempt to create a scandal. But as a legal campaigning event it doesn't matter if she was there or not because legally she could be.

    Do have to laugh though. "Its a work event" accepted without question with the PM's fiance there by teh same people now screeching on Twitter about "conspiracies"
    If they were remotely competent they would have corrected the mistake. No downside. As it is phatboi will present it as a lie at pmq and his MPs will bray their heads off
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    This is the fundamental problem with this pile-on attempt.

    As campaigning was legal, their presence was legal. Their overnight stay in a hotel was legal. The police looked at it and concluded that as campaigning was legal there was nothing to investigate.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    I'm glad I don't live in the Chiltern Hundreds. I'd be getting fed up with the sleazy stewards being foisted on me and my hard-working neighbours.

    Looking at the Chiltern Hills, it seems one of the seats that actually does represent it is Chesham and Amersham, and so has itself had a by-election in the last few years. Although it looks like Steve Baker might be the MP for the actual Children Hundreds itself, or at least part of it.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637
    kle4 said:

    I'm glad I don't live in the Chiltern Hundreds. I'd be getting fed up with the sleazy stewards being foisted on me and my hard-working neighbours.

    Looking at the Chiltern Hills, it seems one of the seats that actually does represent it is Chesham and Amersham, and so has itself had a by-election in the last few years. Although it looks like Steve Baker might be the MP for the actual Children Hundreds itself, or at least part of it.
    There's always steward of the Manor of northstead
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    About what? AIUI a spokesperson was asked a question at the time and gave the wrong answer. Its only become a "lie" now because of the attempt to create a scandal. But as a legal campaigning event it doesn't matter if she was there or not because legally she could be.

    Do have to laugh though. "Its a work event" accepted without question with the PM's fiance there by teh same people now screeching on Twitter about "conspiracies"
    If they were remotely competent they would have corrected the mistake. No downside. As it is phatboi will present it as a lie at pmq and his MPs will bray their heads off
    I’m not following this as closely as I should.

    But I wondered if the spokesman’s original denial (“she wasn’t there”) was strictly accurate in the sense that Rayner was not in the room when Keir had his beer, and only looks slightly misleading in hindsight.

    If Boris wants to use this as “lie”, let him.
    His word is worthless, and if Keir has any competence he’ll find an appropriate response.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 100,923
    kle4 said:

    I'm glad I don't live in the Chiltern Hundreds. I'd be getting fed up with the sleazy stewards being foisted on me and my hard-working neighbours.

    Looking at the Chiltern Hills, it seems one of the seats that actually does represent it is Chesham and Amersham, and so has itself had a by-election in the last few years. Although it looks like Steve Baker might be the MP for the actual Children Hundreds itself, or at least part of it.
    Chesham and Amersham rather posher than Wycombe though.

    Hence the LDs are the Tories main opponents in the former but Labour are the Tories main opponents in the latter
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983

    I’m not at all confident of LD chances in this seat. They start way behind and Parish’s downfall is not equivalent to O-Patz’s contempt for voters.

    How many voters look at porn might also be a hidden factor.

    "We all do porn - but this daft sod got caught. At work. But he was a good constituency MP, so ho-hum...."
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    About what? AIUI a spokesperson was asked a question at the time and gave the wrong answer. Its only become a "lie" now because of the attempt to create a scandal. But as a legal campaigning event it doesn't matter if she was there or not because legally she could be.

    Do have to laugh though. "Its a work event" accepted without question with the PM's fiance there by teh same people now screeching on Twitter about "conspiracies"
    If they were remotely competent they would have corrected the mistake. No downside. As it is phatboi will present it as a lie at pmq and his MPs will bray their heads off
    I’m not following this as closely as I should.

    But I wondered if the spokesman’s original denial (“she wasn’t there”) was strictly accurate in the sense that Rayner was not in the room when Keir had his beer, and only looks slightly misleading in hindsight.

    If Boris wants to use this as “lie”, let him.
    His word is worthless, and if Keir has any competence he’ll find an appropriate response.
    "It was LEGAL for her to be there. It was not legal for your wife to be there" as one example
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,259
    What would be an appropriate suspension from the Commons? One day? One week?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Bugger "some aide," labours top press people will have been all over this from the beginning. It at least looks incompetent.
  • Just back from a 10K run. Boiling out there in SW London, can’t believe it’s only 17
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,077

    kle4 said:

    I'm glad I don't live in the Chiltern Hundreds. I'd be getting fed up with the sleazy stewards being foisted on me and my hard-working neighbours.

    Looking at the Chiltern Hills, it seems one of the seats that actually does represent it is Chesham and Amersham, and so has itself had a by-election in the last few years. Although it looks like Steve Baker might be the MP for the actual Children Hundreds itself, or at least part of it.
    There's always steward of the Manor of northstead
    Believe that's the one that Parish will apply for, as Khan has just applied for Crown Steward and Bailiff for the Chiltern Hundreds.

    At least, I think that's the situation.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    Pensfold said:

    Will Labour give way to Lib Dems in Tiverton?

    Will Lib Dems give way to Labour in Tiverton?

    Or will neither give way and let Conservatives back in?

    Labour know only the LDs can beat the Tories in Tiverton. And the LDs can decide not to campaign in Wakefield.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Bugger "some aide," labours top press people will have been all over this from the beginning. It at least looks incompetent.
    As to whether Rayner was at an event she was legally allowed to be at?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,152
    Pensfold said:

    Will Labour give way to Lib Dems in Tiverton?

    Will Lib Dems give way to Labour in Tiverton?

    Or will neither give way and let Conservatives back in?

    Could be that none of those things happen.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    Scott_xP said:

    We’ve now been told Neil Parish has gone to his constituency to resign and will be making a statement on camera shortly.
    More on #C4News https://twitter.com/darshnasoni/status/1520372676086448128

    It's interesting that the reason he has to go is not because of the initial offence but because of the way he initially kept quiet and therefore allowed suspicion to fall on other Tory MPs in general.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513

    I’m not at all confident of LD chances in this seat. They start way behind and Parish’s downfall is not equivalent to O-Patz’s contempt for voters.

    How many voters look at porn might also be a hidden factor.

    "We all do porn - but this daft sod got caught. At work. But he was a good constituency MP, so ho-hum...."
    Pretty much.

    Although, is it true that all the voters of T&H “do porn”?

    I thought most of it was made in California, and certain Eastern European countries.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,202

    What would be an appropriate suspension from the Commons? One day? One week?


    By the nads, probably.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Bugger "some aide," labours top press people will have been all over this from the beginning. It at least looks incompetent.
    As to whether Rayner was at an event she was legally allowed to be at?
    Yes. Giving correct answers to questions is rule 2 of politics after Know how to count.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983

    I’m not at all confident of LD chances in this seat. They start way behind and Parish’s downfall is not equivalent to O-Patz’s contempt for voters.

    How many voters look at porn might also be a hidden factor.

    "We all do porn - but this daft sod got caught. At work. But he was a good constituency MP, so ho-hum...."
    Pretty much.

    Although, is it true that all the voters of T&H “do porn”?

    I thought most of it was made in California, and certain Eastern European countries.
    Place is heaving with step moms.....
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    edited April 30
    MP making a statement from a few years back.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcdzZ5zRZgg
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Bugger "some aide," labours top press people will have been all over this from the beginning. It at least looks incompetent.
    As to whether Rayner was at an event she was legally allowed to be at?
    Yes. Giving correct answers to questions is rule 2 of politics after Know how to count.
    Its not remotely equivalent though is it?

    "Why did you lie that she wasn't there"
    "We didn't knowingly lie - she wasn't in the photo which was the question"
    "Ah so she WAS there. The police need to investigate"
    "As it was legal for her to be there they already investigated and there is nothing to look at as it was legal for her to be there"

    Its genuinely funny that the party of lies and crime is so desperately pushing this.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,202
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61284686
    In an exclusive interview with BBC South West, he said: "The situation was that - funnily enough it was tractors I was looking at. I did get into another website that had a very similar name and I watched it for a bit which I shouldn't have done. But my crime - biggest crime - is that on another occasion I went in a second time."
    Asked if that was deliberate he said: "That was deliberate... that was sitting waiting to vote on the side of the chamber."…
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,701
    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983
    I don't see why Labour should stand back in a seat they were second last time. They need this by-election to calibrate how their message is going down in the SW. Not too many seats in range here, but they could be the difference between getting power and not.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,152
    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 14,513
    nico679 said:

    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .

    JFC.

    “Funnily enough”.

    This is up there with “Funnily enough, I don’t sweat due to a bizarre condition I picked up in the Falklands”.

    For this alone he must resign.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983
    Nigelb said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61284686
    In an exclusive interview with BBC South West, he said: "The situation was that - funnily enough it was tractors I was looking at. I did get into another website that had a very similar name and I watched it for a bit which I shouldn't have done. But my crime - biggest crime - is that on another occasion I went in a second time."
    Asked if that was deliberate he said: "That was deliberate... that was sitting waiting to vote on the side of the chamber."…

    Big year for tractors. Have now brought down

    1. Putin's plan for Kyiv

    2. Neil Parish

  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,158
    So has anyone worked out what porn website has a very similar name to a website about tractors?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,430

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 55,591
    Tractors have always been a gateway drug…

    Helena [email protected]· 8m
    In an interview with the @bbcmartynoates Neil Parish has admitted watching pornography twice in the House of Commons.
    Mr Parish said the first time was accidental after looking at tractors, but the second time was deliberate
    https://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61284686


    https://twitter.com/ruskin147/status/1520399767305695232

    Maybe it was backhoes....
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    nico679 said:

    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .

    I can see his mistake. He was obviously searching for tractor porn.

    image
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    nico679 said:

    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .

    Yes, the accidental explanation was possible to begin with, but it makes no difference if you then accept you went back for seconds.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983
    In other news, Russia closing in on 600 confirmed tanks killed/nabbed by tractors
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712
    nico679 said:

    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .

    Phwoar!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btEpF334Rtc
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,371
    edited April 30
    Please let us know soon as the markets open on this. LD have to be value. Constituents will want to kick the tories.

    God almighty, this is 1992-7 Redux.
  • Daily Mail must be gutted that the Tories have once again pushed Keir out of the public consciousness
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,371
    We just need a Martin Bell.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,077
    IF the Conservatives have any sense, methinks they will select a woman to contest the by-election in Tiverton & Honiton.

    There was an interesting case in WA State just over a dozen years ago, when guy who was a Republican state representative, was attending a committee hearing on other side of state, decided to go to local porno store that evening, and hooked up with a male companion.

    Next morning, he discovered that his "friend" had stolen his wallet. So he called the local police to report the crime, assuming that they'd keep mum re: circumstances, because he was a fire-fighter. Unfortunately for him, the cops ratted him out to the press. And due to the media coverage, he was forced to resign.

    At that point, local Republicans in his district had to chose a temporary replacement. Their pick was a young Hispanic woman who was a conservative Christian and active GOPer; in fact she was an aide to Republican congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rogers, a member of US House GOP leadership.

    She won the subsequent special election rather easily. Her name - Jamie Herrera Beutler. She went on to run for and win election herself to Congress - and was one of the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach 45 after his attempted Putsch.

    JHB is running for re-election, opposed by MAGA maniac. And she's gonna get re-elected, thanks to Washington State's Top Two primary. because the two who advance to the general will be her and the Putinist. And she will win, thanks to sane Republicans AND Democrats.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 19,157

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Bugger "some aide," labours top press people will have been all over this from the beginning. It at least looks incompetent.
    As to whether Rayner was at an event she was legally allowed to be at?
    Yes. Giving correct answers to questions is rule 2 of politics after Know how to count.
    Its not remotely equivalent though is it?

    "Why did you lie that she wasn't there"
    "We didn't knowingly lie - she wasn't in the photo which was the question"
    "Ah so she WAS there. The police need to investigate"
    "As it was legal for her to be there they already investigated and there is nothing to look at as it was legal for her to be there"

    Its genuinely funny that the party of lies and crime is so desperately pushing this.
    Chill mate I am not a Tory.

    Equivalent to what?

    It's not the end of the world but it has been sloppily and incompetently handled. It unnecessarily hands Johnson and the Tory press something to misrepresent, and feeds a All as bad as each other narrative.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,371

    I don't see why Labour should stand back in a seat they were second last time. They need this by-election to calibrate how their message is going down in the SW. Not too many seats in range here, but they could be the difference between getting power and not.

    No I don't agree and I'm a Labour voter. I would support the LibDems in this constituency.

    Our hatred of the tories will unite us.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    I don't see why Labour should stand back in a seat they were second last time. They need this by-election to calibrate how their message is going down in the SW. Not too many seats in range here, but they could be the difference between getting power and not.

    They don't need to stand back, the candidate and others may not have wanted them to stand back in North Shropshire, but the voters did it for them.

    And from the looks of it pre 2015 Tiverton was a seat where the LDs would typically be second, whereas North Shropshire Labour were traditionally second for the last 20 years.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 41,202
    Another large fire in Russia,
    Fairly sure this isn’t the Ukrainians, as it’s several thousand miles away.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1520285786880491522
    Russian Far East: Fire at GRES-2 Power plant in Sakhalin this morning https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/30-april-fire-at-gres2-power-plant-in-sakhalin-this-morning

    Though a number of those forcibly deported are somewhere in the vicinity.
  • Heathener said:

    I don't see why Labour should stand back in a seat they were second last time. They need this by-election to calibrate how their message is going down in the SW. Not too many seats in range here, but they could be the difference between getting power and not.

    No I don't agree and I'm a Labour voter. I would support the LibDems in this constituency.

    Our hatred of the tories will unite us.
    Me too. Lib Dems are clearly best placed here
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,371
    edited April 30

    Daily Mail must be gutted that the Tories have once again pushed Keir out of the public consciousness

    There must be some new nasty angle they can contrive on Angela Rayner? Or Meghan Markle?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 10,569
    stodge said:

    I don't believe there are any local elections within the constituency next week. The LDs are part of the ruling coalition at Mid Devon - both it and East Devon were Conservative controlled until the 2019 elections (just a hint for thos looking ahead, the 2023 local elections are going to be much easier for the Conservatives and much harder for the LDs).

    So much depends on candidate selection and establishing a clear narrative of being the only possible alternative to the incumbent.

    Spot on. Candidate selection is crucial.

    The Tories got it wrong in Shropshire, the LDs nailed it. Made all the difference.

    As long as Head Office doesn't try to parachute in one of Boris's chums the Conservatives should be ok.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 9,077
    NYT ($) - Pressure Mounts on Cawthorn as Scandals Pile Up
    Representative Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina, once a bright young star in the conservative firmament, finds himself besieged by accusations and insinuations.

    Besieged by multiplying scandals and salacious accusations, Representative Madison Cawthorn, Republican of North Carolina, is under mounting pressure from both parties to end his short career in Congress.

    In rapid succession, Mr. Cawthorn, who entered Congress as a rising star of the party’s far right, has been accused of falsely suggesting that his Republican colleagues routinely throw cocaine-fueled orgies, insider trading and an inappropriate relationship with a male aide. This week, he was detained at an airport, where police said he tried to bring a loaded handgun onto an airplane, the second time he has attempted that.

    That came just days after pictures surfaced of him wearing women’s lingerie as part of a cruise ship game, imagery that might not go over well in the conservative stretches of his Western North Carolina district. And last month he was charged with driving with a revoked license for the second time since 2017.

    The deluge of revelations and charges have left him on an island even within his own party. A political group supporting Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, has been pouring money into an ad campaign accusing Mr. Cawthorn of being a fame-seeking liar. The group is supporting the campaign of a more mainstream Republican, State Senator Chuck Edwards, who is running against Mr. Cawthorn. And the far-right, anti-establishment wing of the party now views the first-term congressman with similar skepticism, as someone who is falsely selling himself as a gatekeeper in his state to former President Donald J. Trump.

    After initially blaming Democrats for the onslaught, Mr. Cawthorn on Friday said it was Republicans who were targeting him because he threatens the status quo.

    “I want to change the GOP for the better, and I believe in America First,” he wrote on Twitter. “I can understand the establishment attacking those beliefs, but just digging stuff up from my early 20s to smear me is pathetic.”

    At 26 years old, Mr. Cawthorn is not far removed from his early 20s, and Republicans running to unseat him in the May 17 North Carolina primary said the drumbeat of revelations could put his seat at risk if he secures the nomination for a second term. . . .

    SSI - Sad to see them piling on against this latest recruit to the cause of Ukrainian Freedom - NOT.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,722
    edited April 30
    Is this two Tory MP'S resigning in two days?
    Majority gone by Autumn at this rate.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Last time I visited at the beginning of March I was surprised by the way most of them were scrolling through their phones rather than paying attention to the debates. That wasn't the case a few years ago. The cameras wouldn't usually be able to read a smartphone screen.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315

    I don't see why Labour should stand back in a seat they were second last time. They need this by-election to calibrate how their message is going down in the SW. Not too many seats in range here, but they could be the difference between getting power and not.

    Probably because they know their ceiling in a seat like this is about 30% which isn't enough to win.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    edited April 30
    RobD said:

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
    MPs are not supposed to read a speech verbatim, since the fiction is to be maintained that they are debating and not just reciting prepared statements, but the official rule is they can use devices or papers as an aide memoire, and Speakers seem pretty lenient with that. And reality is if you are say in there for potentially hours and it won't disrupt anyone no reason you cannot be productive and do some email work.

    In October 2011, the House agreed to allow the use of hand-held electronic devices (but not laptops) in the Chamber, provided that they are silent and used in a way which does not impair decorum


    https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/4887/electronic-devices-phones-and-cameras/
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113
    edited April 30

    IF the Conservatives have any sense, methinks they will select a woman to contest the by-election in Tiverton & Honiton.

    There was an interesting case in WA State just over a dozen years ago, when guy who was a Republican state representative, was attending a committee hearing on other side of state, decided to go to local porno store that evening, and hooked up with a male companion.

    Next morning, he discovered that his "friend" had stolen his wallet. So he called the local police to report the crime, assuming that they'd keep mum re: circumstances, because he was a fire-fighter. Unfortunately for him, the cops ratted him out to the press. And due to the media coverage, he was forced to resign.

    At that point, local Republicans in his district had to chose a temporary replacement. Their pick was a young Hispanic woman who was a conservative Christian and active GOPer; in fact she was an aide to Republican congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rogers, a member of US House GOP leadership.

    She won the subsequent special election rather easily. Her name - Jamie Herrera Beutler. She went on to run for and win election herself to Congress - and was one of the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach 45 after his attempted Putsch.

    JHB is running for re-election, opposed by MAGA maniac. And she's gonna get re-elected, thanks to Washington State's Top Two primary. because the two who advance to the general will be her and the Putinist. And she will win, thanks to sane Republicans AND Democrats.

    OTOH as OKC said earlier, there is a potential LD female candidate in the area in the form of Sarah Wollaston - the doctor and Tory turned LD at Totnes (which is on the other side of the Exe valley and a bit further, in case you don't know). However, T&H is not - so far as I am aware - nearly so high on the fruitbat loopery alternative stuff as Totnes famously is (alternative in the Haight Ashbury rather than MAGA sense). Edit: the implication being there are not so many LDs or Greens.
  • Heathener said:

    Daily Mail must be gutted that the Tories have once again pushed Keir out of the public consciousness

    There must be some new nasty angle they can contrive on Angela Rayner? Or Meghan Markle?
    Surely they can say that Rayner's legs caused Keir to break the law.

    Hope you are keeping well BTW
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637
    RobD said:

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
    I would have thought the firewall would have blocked pornsites anyway.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    Nigelb said:

    Another large fire in Russia,
    Fairly sure this isn’t the Ukrainians, as it’s several thousand miles away.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1520285786880491522
    Russian Far East: Fire at GRES-2 Power plant in Sakhalin this morning https://russia.liveuamap.com/en/2022/30-april-fire-at-gres2-power-plant-in-sakhalin-this-morning

    Though a number of those forcibly deported are somewhere in the vicinity.

    One possibility is that their control systems are being hacked, although this would suggest bad design.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 22,722
    Come on Watford!
  • Hey @dixiedean! How you doing Sir
  • RobD said:

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
    I would have thought the firewall would have blocked pornsites anyway.
    Do they have 4G in there?

    Perhaps a DAS
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,143
    Chris said:

    So has anyone worked out what porn website has a very similar name to a website about tractors?

    Maybe he was googling for 'big wheels' and autocorrect went a bit off-target.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 18,315
    edited April 30
    You get the feeling most of the cartoons tomorrow will include tractors.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113

    Chris said:

    So has anyone worked out what porn website has a very similar name to a website about tractors?

    Maybe he was googling for 'big wheels' and autocorrect went a bit off-target.
    Window cleaning contractors?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 19,712

    Daily Mail must be gutted that the Tories have once again pushed Keir out of the public consciousness

    Tory MP watches Tractor porn in the Commons. Nothing to see here. Now about Angela Raynor being legally at a campaign event. THAT is a scandal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983
    Heathener said:

    Please let us know soon as the markets open on this. LD have to be value. Constituents will want to kick the tories.

    God almighty, this is 1992-7 Redux.

    Looking forward to the "Only Labour can win here!" leaflets......
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 29,754
    The 2000 Guineas - "Perfect Power" is a live outsider imo. Solid group 1 form as a 2yo here and in France, comfortable winner of the Greenham on reappearance. Christophe Soumillon rides. Top jockey. 22/1 looks big.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,637
    OT
    Before I retired from school I remember trying to access PB in my lunchtime and getting blocked by the firewall. I then had to go cap in hand to the head explaining that it may have had betting in the title but I was there for the politics.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088
    Obviously Parish was researching whether as a result of the war in Ukraine there had been a shift in descriptions of performers as Russian or Ukrainian, as a microstudy of Ukrainian national identity in a time of crisis.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 24,113
    Imagine having to remove one's model Ferguson TE20 from the bookshelf behind your desk before the next zoom meeting.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 77,088

    OT
    Before I retired from school I remember trying to access PB in my lunchtime and getting blocked by the firewall. I then had to go cap in hand to the head explaining that it may have had betting in the title but I was there for the politics.

    I used to get that every about every other page when trying to access PB, which seemed very strange, so wondered if maybe it was actually triggering some kind of obscenity filer when words like shit, fuck or psephology came up.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,983
    kle4 said:

    nico679 said:

    Lmao ! He initially accidentally found the porn on a tractor website and then went back for more !

    One time you might get away with this , the second time looks very stupid .

    Yes, the accidental explanation was possible to begin with, but it makes no difference if you then accept you went back for seconds.
    He could no longer plough on....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 16,785
    edited April 30

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I think Parish would have got away with it if he hadn’t have lied that he clicked on the links accidentally.

    I click

    IshmaelZ said:

    Meanwhile the attempted pile-on on Twitter to try and remove Starmer / Raynor has been funny.

    "Why haven't the police investigated" - they have
    "It was illegal" - posting documents showing it was legal
    "Where did they stay" - ignoring that hotels were open
    And eventually we get to the truth - "its unfair on Boris"

    Why lie about it?
    What lie.
    They said Rayner wasn't there
    Rochdale Pioneers addresses this.

    Also, was she there at the same time, ie when that photo was taken?
    If no, labour need to say no.
    I'm not Labour as you know. But "was she there yes or no" only matters if being there was illegal.

    It was legal.

    So it doesn't matter at all whether she was or wasn't, or that some aide didn't have the facts when asked.
    Starmer drank lager from a bottle, and Rayner allegedly opened her legs to temp
    Johnson with forbidden fruit that means Johnson is innocent of all spurious charrges
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,708

    RobD said:

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
    I would have thought the firewall would have blocked pornsites anyway.
    There were probably complaints.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,430

    RobD said:

    Just a technical query.
    There are television cameras all over the HoC chamber. Are they capable of see mobile phone screens?
    Also do MPs regularly look at their phones during debates?

    Until very recently they were banned. Not sure why they decided to do away with that.
    I would have thought the firewall would have blocked pornsites anyway.
    Was it on the wifi, or just over the phone network?
This discussion has been closed.